Its talking about the growing trend of packaged plays, only not previously used packaged plays that were say, pass plays to attack multiple pass coverages, but combining runs and passes and using post snap reads and uptempo no huddle to decide post snap, which is what Weeds ran at Okie St.

The upshot would be that we have a QB that has run offensive concepts at the forefront of current offensive thinking in football.

Problem would be that Paddy isnt exactly a coach at the forefront of current offensive thinking in football.

e0y2e3 wrote:I refuse to click on Grantland links, so a summary would be a appreciated.

Techno Bowl was presceient & awesome.

What Weeds did at tOSU wasn't necesarilly dumbed down and not-ready-for the NFL, it was a line-read offense in the vein of Peyton, and this ternd will eclipse what we think of as traditional by-the-playbook offense. But this piece went into great detail.

JCoz wrote:Its talking about the growing trend of packaged plays, only not previously used packaged plays that were say, pass plays to attack multiple pass coverages, but combining runs and passes and using post snap reads and uptempo no huddle to decide post snap, which is what Weeds ran at Okie St.

The upshot would be that we have a QB that has run offensive concepts at the forefront of current offensive thinking in football.

Problem would be that Paddy isnt exactly a coach at the forefront of current offensive thinking in football.

smartfootball.com is a great site and it's a great Twitter follow. Awesome stuff.

That's truth.

Also truth is that the very second Brandon Weeden resembles, at all, either Peyton Manning or Aaron Rodgers in terms of recognizing, reading and reacting to what NFL defenses are doing (and congrats on defining for yourself 'elite', JB) and consistently beating them to the point where he's known and feared for it, I will acknowledge it and make sure to sticky that thread for a good, long time.

I'm not going to argue or belabor the point any longer as it's pretty clear where we're all coming from and on what points we agree, but suffice it to say that's a long, long way off. College is See Jane Run compared to the latin edition of Les Miserables that the NFL will feed him.

The fact he did it in school is better than him not having done it in school. That's about it though.

And if he is a prodigy here's hoping Shurmur suddenly becomes Nike McCarthy too. Because the prodigy will be in yet another system with another group of coaches and coordinators when he turns 30 next year. Will they let him loose anyway? Are they imaginative or secure enough to give him the reigns?

He has this year to show it, IMO. Not to get there and not to translate into wins or anything else. To show it. If he doesn't he's starting all over under a new regime. Shit, he may be anyway, regardless of what they do.

I want to see something there that tells me he's special. It was there with Bernie in '85. That's the only reference point I have. And nothing I see from the guy YET says it. Though I wouldn't expect it too til real players are playing for real.

Then we're gonna know really fast. And any weakness or blood and his teammates and opposing defensive players/coaches will know even sooner.

FUDU wrote:Meh, yeah he's awesome but the Raiders suck in too many other areas. I can handle Bo Jackson with a slew of teams.

I'm always amazed the Bills aren't just other-worldly in that game.

If it's going off the 1990 season, they should be about unbeatable. Same with the 49ers.

Swerb wrote:Go start a blog if you want to tell the world your incomprehendible ramblings.

Cerebral_DownTime wrote:I have a big arm and can throw the ball pretty damn far...... maybe even over those moutains. The Browns should sign me, i'll let you all in locker room to drink beer. Then we can all go out the parking lot to watch me do motorcycle stunts.

It's good that he ran it in college. Doesn't mean the Browns will employ it, nor that it ensures success any more than running"pro style" offenses in college helped Brady Quinn or Jimmy Clausen. We'll see soon enough.

peeker643 wrote:smartfootball.com is a great site and it's a great Twitter follow. Awesome stuff.

That's truth.

Also truth is that the very second Brandon Weeden resembles, at all, either Peyton Manning or Aaron Rodgers in terms of recognizing, reading and reacting to what NFL defenses are doing (and congrats on defining for yourself 'elite', JB) and consistently beating them to the point where he's known and feared for it, I will acknowledge it and make sure to sticky that thread for a good, long time.

I'm not going to argue or belabor the point any longer as it's pretty clear where we're all coming from and on what points we agree, but suffice it to say that's a long, long way off. College is See Jane Run compared to the latin edition of Les Miserables that the NFL will feed him.

The fact he did it in school is better than him not having done it in school. That's about it though.

And if he is a prodigy here's hoping Shurmur suddenly becomes Nike McCarthy too. Because the prodigy will be in yet another system with another group of coaches and coordinators when he turns 30 next year. Will they let him loose anyway? Are they imaginative or secure enough to give him the reigns?

He has this year to show it, IMO. Not to get there and not to translate into wins or anything else. To show it. If he doesn't he's starting all over under a new regime. Shit, he may be anyway, regardless of what they do.

I want to see something there that tells me he's special. It was there with Bernie in '85. That's the only reference point I have. And nothing I see from the guy YET says it. Though I wouldn't expect it too til real players are playing for real.

Then we're gonna know really fast. And any weakness or blood and his teammates and opposing defensive players/coaches will know even sooner.

Peeks I'm not sure I understand your point here. What does the above have to do with the concepts talked about in the article? It doesn't seem to have anything to do with the article.

JCoz wrote:Peeks I'm not sure I understand your point here. What does the above have to do with the concepts talked about in the article? It doesn't seem to have anything to do with the article.

I'm theorizing, upon lack of other evidence, that as this piece suggests Peeks world-view of Weeds may possibly be flawed. Not "is", but possibly. Perhaps Weeds didn't play in a shit gimmick offense where he's another David Klingler but rather was on the vanguard of a coming trend and he has big-time college experience in an area of real importance for a QB prospect, and that runs contrary to Peeker's conclusions that all he brings to the table is a big arm, a chronological challenge, and a nancyboy pocket presence. Rather than discuss, he's dug in and now holding his breath that unless Weeds "show us something" along a fixed & artificial timeline he will draw another immutable conclusion.

Which is of course a crap take beneith his knowledge & analyitcal ability and he's being lazy.

This may well be completely wrong, but in the absence of his opinion on the actual subject at hand, I'm lacking other resources upon which to draw a better and more thoughtful conclusion.

And as to the "elite" QB sub-thread, I'm just waiting for a rejoinder, Peeker. I'm not sure that I have this down 100%, but I've put forth a theory. It's gotta be better than "I know it when I see it" though. Ask Hiko or SD. I've had my quota with that train of thought this week. ;-)

Be great if there was some discusssion to refute, review with more information or another POV, or concur. Love to do some bidness with you on that topic.

Well to me it's nice that Weeds is familiar with running these concepts, but I think the concepts are interesting because it seems have the potential to simplify the QB's responsibilities in a way that you might not need a top 3 QB to move the football consistently. Doesn't mean you can have a bum behind center, but Weeden has certainly shown that he can run these concepts successfully. It's relevant because this isn't a college football gimmick offensive strategy and is just scratching the surface and being implemented in the NFL. It's not relevant until we see some offensive ingenuity on the staff to try and implement these.

I think the concepts are alot more interesting as a subject alone, then what it Neccessarily means regarding Weeden and the browns. I can't for the life of me get very excited about these guys actually doing this with our offense based on what I've seen from paddy here and in st Louis before that.

I don't disagree Coz. But as Weeds was the tangible product I think he is relavant, and as the current best opportunity/hope for the Browns to move forward I think he's central in a sense to the larger trend topic as well as what it means here in town. Peeker is dead on right about one thing: Weeds is a blank canvas, and we will see what we will see. I just think there's more to it than that in a vaccum and seeing as this forum is moribund except for some one liner zingers by a small group of us frat brothers some actual discussion would be a welcome change of pace.

I am no huge fan of Paddy McNepotism. It was clear to me he was overwhelmed and there are valid reasons for that: no off season, no talent, and no coaching support. IDK what Chilly and Cromwell will bring to the table, in addition to strides being made on the other organizational and situational shortcomings. In that sense, the staff is also a blank canvas. The time is nowhere nera right to draw conclusions with them.

This may not be the best season in terms of W's and L's, but it is the most interesting in a long time, and the most potentially opportunistic.

peeker643 wrote:smartfootball.com is a great site and it's a great Twitter follow. Awesome stuff.

That's truth.

Also truth is that the very second Brandon Weeden resembles, at all, either Peyton Manning or Aaron Rodgers in terms of recognizing, reading and reacting to what NFL defenses are doing (and congrats on defining for yourself 'elite', JB) and consistently beating them to the point where he's known and feared for it, I will acknowledge it and make sure to sticky that thread for a good, long time.

I'm not going to argue or belabor the point any longer as it's pretty clear where we're all coming from and on what points we agree, but suffice it to say that's a long, long way off. College is See Jane Run compared to the latin edition of Les Miserables that the NFL will feed him.

The fact he did it in school is better than him not having done it in school. That's about it though.

And if he is a prodigy here's hoping Shurmur suddenly becomes Nike McCarthy too. Because the prodigy will be in yet another system with another group of coaches and coordinators when he turns 30 next year. Will they let him loose anyway? Are they imaginative or secure enough to give him the reigns?

He has this year to show it, IMO. Not to get there and not to translate into wins or anything else. To show it. If he doesn't he's starting all over under a new regime. Shit, he may be anyway, regardless of what they do.

I want to see something there that tells me he's special. It was there with Bernie in '85. That's the only reference point I have. And nothing I see from the guy YET says it. Though I wouldn't expect it too til real players are playing for real.

Then we're gonna know really fast. And any weakness or blood and his teammates and opposing defensive players/coaches will know even sooner.

Peeks I'm not sure I understand your point here. What does the above have to do with the concepts talked about in the article? It doesn't seem to have anything to do with the article.

Nothing to do with the article. I like the site and the article.

All I'm saying is that the offense he ran in college, while comforting to know he has experience in it, means next to nothing in the NFL.

I do believe the article hits on the next trend in the NFL (though one other 'elite' QBs have already employed to varying degrees of success) but as it applies to Weeden and the Browns potential success it's still all going to come down to Weeden.

He's a pocket passer. If the OL wins battles and Weeden demonstrates poise and ability in the pocket he can run that offense or most others.

Many posters seem to be looking for reasons for Weeden to succeed. Whether it be the offense or what have you. I'm saying that while I respect the people at smartfotball.com a great deal, that Weeden's success or failure will come down to, very simply, Weeden's ability to handle pressure (given the game has gone almost completely to passers and getting to the passers).

And it's really that simple. No rejoinder needed. If the OL and the QB are capable at preventing a great deal of pocket pressure or working through it Weeden can be successful. If they aren't, he's going to be the one to wear it.

As to his age, it is a factor. Not that he's Blanda or gimpy or whatever, but the developmental time is cut down. It may be through no fault of his own, but if he's killed back there or struggles with pocket pressure, there's not the same developmental timeline that a 22 yr old has.

The thread wasn't created to discuss the system/trend so much as Weeden's role in it as the Browns QB. I stand by the statement that we'll know (or have a pretty good idea) if the guy is our guy sooner rather than later.

He has the size and the arm and he had the accuracy in college. I'm interested in seeing what he does with the opportunity.

peeker643 wrote:The thread wasn't created to discuss the system/trend so much as Weeden's role in it as the Browns QB.

Isn't the title of the thread 'A trend with weeds'?

James wrote:What Weeds did at tOSU wasn't necesarilly dumbed down and not-ready-for the NFL, it was a line-read offense in the vein of Peyton, and this ternd will eclipse what we think of as traditional by-the-playbook offense. But this piece went into great detail.

I think you're misreading the article a bit. What made the other OSU model special was that they dropped the playbook (Tim Couch!) in favor of a system where plays were simple but designed to work as either a run or pass plays post-snap. That's what made it unique. They let Weeds read the play after the snap and either go with the primary option of run or go with a secondary option - sounding like it was almost always just Blackmon.

I don't see how this is anything at all to be excited about. It is not something that translates directly to Peyton/Brady/Brees/Rodgers methods of dominating passing in the NFL.

What it comes down to is the QB has to be able to accurately read a defense almost immediately after the snap. Plenty of guys are in the league who can make the throws but what elevates them above either a system QB or a middling QB is almost always their ability to read the D presnap. And while the run/pass combo plays make sense in college the complexity in blocking and pass rush in the NFL seems like it wouldn't be an even remotely viable option. Essentially the reason why it worked for the other OSU is that Blackmon was much better than the guy covering him and their linemen were capable of stopping pass rushes even when they were oriented towards run blocking. So Weeds could throw with confidence to the space he expects Blackmon to be occupying. He was also playing from the shotgun so he's able to read the rush better in the fraction of a second before committing to a pass - fractions that were available because his OLmen could beat the pass rush even when they were blocking primarily for the run.

This does give some insight, IMHO, into some of the pre-draft problems associated with Weeden regarding his ability to operate when plays break down. I haven't spent time watching what critics were talking about but it's certainly possible that he had the run/pass option and decided to call a pass at or after snap and then didn't have a target and knew he didn't have sufficient blocking to keep him upright.

Gives me a little concern that he didn't do a lot of work on progressions or pre-snap reads. He could basically cheat and let the DL/LB first movements dictate his decision. The only presnap adjustment was directing Blackmon to use one of two routes.

In all seriousness, it's just a little more complex than saying the one variable is Weeds having time. This piece shed light on skill set.

Isn't that part of a skill set though. He can move as well as Brady - can he use the pocket as well?

Reason this is valid to be concerned about is, as Peeker alluded to, how defense is now being played to counter offense. Teams understand that pretty much the ONLY way to stop the passing game is pressure. Again, rules, rules rules. All favoring the forward pass. Handcuffing defensive personnel.

It's safe to say that Brandon Weeden is going to face more pressure than a QB of 5 years ago - no matter how efficient the line.

Lastly, it's really important concerning Weeden because that was an area of concern before he ever arrived here. Being concerned about a weakness, in an era where that weakness is going to be exploited as much as any era in the game ever...that's not unwarranted concern.

Bottom line is we just don't know. We have no earthly idea. We had some guys on here blowing themselves over their pimping of Mark Sanchez before they had any idea that the guy couldn't go thru his progressions and played the game too slow. It's the same with Weeds. We don't know.

Key takeaway from the article: Oklahoma State was successful because Weeden was smart enough to read a defense and create mismatches, and call the right plays in the line of fire to make the whole offense hum. What's not to like about that?

Quick, someone make me one of those Obama hopey changy pictures with Weeden's picture on it.

LarsHancock wrote:As we used to say in college, a trend with Weeds is a trend indeed.

That applies somehow.

Key takeaway from the article: Oklahoma State was successful because Weeden was smart enough to read a defense and create mismatches, and call the right plays in the line of fire to make the whole offense hum. What's not to like about that?

Quick, someone make me one of those Obama hopey changy pictures with Weeden's picture on it.

Because Zac Robinson did it just as well or better a few years earlier?

Not sure about those guys, but I saw guys hang numbers in that conference over the last 5 years I wouldn't touch with a ten foot pole.

Zac Robinson hung a 166 QB rating in that conference.

Zac friggin' Robinson.

So I guess it applies, but no more to me than Cliff Klingsbury's numbers.

LarsHancock wrote:As we used to say in college, a trend with Weeds is a trend indeed.

That applies somehow.

Key takeaway from the article: Oklahoma State was successful because Weeden was smart enough to read a defense and create mismatches, and call the right plays in the line of fire to make the whole offense hum. What's not to like about that?

Quick, someone make me one of those Obama hopey changy pictures with Weeden's picture on it.

Because Zac Robinson did it just as well or better a few years earlier?

Not sure about those guys, but I saw guys hang numbers in that conference over the last 5 years I wouldn't touch with a ten foot pole.

Zac Robinson hung a 166 QB rating in that conference.

Zac friggin' Robinson.

So I guess it applies, but no more to me than Cliff Klingsbury's numbers.

Zac Robinson may be one of the best QBs of that 2010 draft class yet, merely by virtue of the fact he's still got a job. For now. Low bar, but still.

Doesn't have the arm of Weeden, and has some other limitations, but has the brain, which is why he's still kicking around the league. And if the brain to run the Ok St offense can keep a piece of shit like him in the league, a giant strapping stud of a QB like Weeden is clearly the next Sid Luckman. Q.E.D.

LarsHancock wrote:Key takeaway from the article: Oklahoma State was successful because Weeden was smart enough to read a defense and create mismatches, and call the right plays in the line of fire to make the whole offense hum. What's not to like about that?

That is not at all the key takeaway of the article. It isn't even remotely the point of the article.

The article is discussing how Oklahoma implemented play packages that allowed the QB to make a post-snap read and either hand off the ball or throw the ball. They had designed plays where the running back expected to get the hand off and the blockers expected to be run blocking but the QB had the option, after getting the ball, of saying screw it and tossing it instead to Blackmon.

IMHO that is not viable in the NFL, particularly in proset formations in place of shotgun formations, so the 'trend' is nonexistent. The concern from the article is that Weeden did not work as much on pre-snap reads. Which was already the concern by in any scouting report about Weeden but this helps explain why that is so.

What are the chances the new owner comes in and cleans house (Holmgren, Heckert, Shurmur) and brings in his own people December 31?

I've always been a proponent of a REAL coach building his system around the players he has, not being stuck in one system and trying endlessly to build a team around it. But with H&H in the booth, Shurmur has no freedom to use a progressive system (if he had the mental capability to do so).

Spin wrote:What are the chances the new owner comes in and cleans house (Holmgren, Heckert, Shurmur) and brings in his own people December 31?

I've always been a proponent of a REAL coach building his system around the players he has, not being stuck in one system and trying endlessly to build a team around it. But with H&H in the booth, Shurmur has no freedom to use a progressive system (if he had the mental capability to do so).

If you're looking for a REAL coach, just, for the love of god, don't associate that with Gruden (as in Jon) or Cowher (as in Bill).

Neither of those guys is coming here, and I wouldn't want them if they would.

LarsHancock wrote:Key takeaway from the article: Oklahoma State was successful because Weeden was smart enough to read a defense and create mismatches, and call the right plays in the line of fire to make the whole offense hum. What's not to like about that?

That is not at all the key takeaway of the article. It isn't even remotely the point of the article.

The article is discussing how Oklahoma implemented play packages that allowed the QB to make a post-snap read and either hand off the ball or throw the ball. They had designed plays where the running back expected to get the hand off and the blockers expected to be run blocking but the QB had the option, after getting the ball, of saying screw it and tossing it instead to Blackmon.

IMHO that is not viable in the NFL, particularly in proset formations in place of shotgun formations, so the 'trend' is nonexistent. The concern from the article is that Weeden did not work as much on pre-snap reads. Which was already the concern by in any scouting report about Weeden but this helps explain why that is so.

I didn't say it was the point of the article, I said it was a takeaway, for me at least.

Regardless of whether it was pre or post snap, Weeden had to make reads and understand the defenses. Sure, the pro scheme and speed will be totally different on both sides of the ball, but at least this shows Weeds has the motor to get it, whether he's done it in a specific pro scheme or not. Think back to the Derek Anderception or Charlie Frye days - they were so easily confused that the offense never had a chance. The mouse on the wheel in their heads was either drunk or asleep. To me, this article points out that Weeden can develop that skillset that he doesn't have over time and experience, and on top of his natural skills he could be a good QB.

Impossible to tell in preseason how big of a gap this is with him right now. We'll see right out of the gate Week 1 vs. Philly though to be sure...

LarsHancock wrote:Key takeaway from the article: Oklahoma State was successful because Weeden was smart enough to read a defense and create mismatches, and call the right plays in the line of fire to make the whole offense hum. What's not to like about that?

That is not at all the key takeaway of the article. It isn't even remotely the point of the article.

The article is discussing how Oklahoma implemented play packages that allowed the QB to make a post-snap read and either hand off the ball or throw the ball. They had designed plays where the running back expected to get the hand off and the blockers expected to be run blocking but the QB had the option, after getting the ball, of saying screw it and tossing it instead to Blackmon.

IMHO that is not viable in the NFL, particularly in proset formations in place of shotgun formations, so the 'trend' is nonexistent. The concern from the article is that Weeden did not work as much on pre-snap reads. Which was already the concern by in any scouting report about Weeden but this helps explain why that is so.

Aaaaand this isn't exactly the point either. It is one case of the point.

The point is that this post-snap package/play read approach is the evolution of the pre-snap package/play read approach. The author posits that time is now ready to see this on Sunday. The QB moves from coach on the field role to point guard role. Potentially it can not be stopped.

Don't somewhere in the neighborhood of half the college and down teams in this country run some sort of the read option? And (without reading the article but following along the thread) isn't that all we are talking about?

peeker643 wrote:The thread wasn't created to discuss the system/trend so much as Weeden's role in it as the Browns QB.

Isn't the title of the thread 'A trend with weeds'?

James wrote:What Weeds did at tOSU wasn't necesarilly dumbed down and not-ready-for the NFL, it was a line-read offense in the vein of Peyton, and this ternd will eclipse what we think of as traditional by-the-playbook offense. But this piece went into great detail.

I think you're misreading the article a bit. What made the other OSU model special was that they dropped the playbook (Tim Couch!) in favor of a system where plays were simple but designed to work as either a run or pass plays post-snap. That's what made it unique. They let Weeds read the play after the snap and either go with the primary option of run or go with a secondary option - sounding like it was almost always just Blackmon.

I don't see how this is anything at all to be excited about. It is not something that translates directly to Peyton/Brady/Brees/Rodgers methods of dominating passing in the NFL.

I dont really agree, They arent "primarily" blocking for run, they ARE blocking for a run play. And there is no added complexity in an inside zone run play in the NFL vs the NCAA. Using the No huddle at a frenetic pace is a tool used to stop teams from setting up exotic blitzes and changing personell. I think its far too early to say whether or not this will be viable in the NFL.

pup wrote:Don't somewhere in the neighborhood of half the college and down teams in this country run some sort of the read option? And (without reading the article but following along the thread) isn't that all we are talking about?

Not exactly, this has nothing to do with a quarterback as a run threat (making it IMO far more viable that trying a read/option offense in the NFL), but this is a read play in a similair vein. A read play that covers alot more ground. Lbers will read run play off the offensive line movement, and if the run is chosen its a normal inside/outside zone run without WR blocking. If the pass is chosen its effectively a play action pass, the difference being that you get to choose after seeing the defense start to defend the play, the idea being the same as a read option, to always make the defense wrong.

This is a gimmik where you are combining limited action in the run game with pseudo bullshit chuck the ball to Justin Blackmon. It's far more Tim Couch than anything. The viability in the NFL is far less than even the read option, which Tebow and Cam can use.

I feel dirty for reading somethign posted on Simmons Land of Simmons, but meh. It's not nearly what it is being portrayed as here, that much is for sure. The difference between "Hey, Look at this fun thing OSU did!!!" and "NFL viable offensive evolution" is the grand canyon right now and most of you are clinging to the latter out of pure blind hope.

This fact couldn't have been more clearly displayed than when Grudan made The Ginger explain his offensive progressions in that stupid ass QB Special. The Ginger was reading a few things as possible and trying entirely to balance between pacing teams to death (never going to work in the NFL) and having a guy that could out jump anyone as his main outlet.

This is a gimmik where you are combining limited action in the run game with pseudo bullshit chuck the ball to Justin Blackmon. It's far more Tim Couch than anything. The viability in the NFL is far less than even the read option, which Tebow and Cam can use.

I feel dirty for reading somethign posted on Simmons Land of Simmons, but meh. It's not nearly what it is being portrayed as here, that much is for sure. The difference between "Hey, Look at this fun thing OSU did!!!" and "NFL viable offensive evolution" is the grand canyon right now and most of you are clinging to the latter out of pure blind hope.

This fact couldn't have been more clearly displayed than when Grudan made The Ginger explain his offensive progressions in that stupid ass QB Special. The Ginger was reading a few things as possible and trying entirely to balance between pacing teams to death (never going to work in the NFL) and having a guy that could out jump anyone as his main outlet.

Personally I dont really care about anything this has to do with Weeden, but assuming this is a gimmick is assuming that the way OSU employed it is as far as this concept can or will go. I definitely do not think the read/option is more viable in the NFL but we will see.

Like stated above, the read option in the NFL with a slow footed QB, or a small guy that cannot take the abuse (so anyone other than Cam) is simply not an option. At best it is play action with an option to hand the ball off.

Since linemen have to assume pass is an option in most cases, they will be unable to get up the field to block the second level so you will need an extremely elusive RB to avoid the linebackers and your receivers to be smart enough to figure it out and strong enough to block the 3rd level. The success of it in college is based on linebackers needing to account for a 2nd runner. At least, IMO.

pup wrote:Like stated above, the read option in the NFL with a slow footed QB, or a small guy that cannot take the abuse (so anyone other than Cam) is simply not an option. At best it is play action with an option to hand the ball off.

But that doesn't work. If you are running a play-action the linemen as still blocking for a pass although they usually attempt to disguise it as much as possible to attempt to get the D to buy into the fake. If the pass rushers hesitate a half-tic then that allows the half-tic delay to pass to work out. If you get that same hesitation in someone in the secondary then you have your viable play action pass attempt.

If you attempt to hand off in a play-action pass the blockers are not attempting to open the gap. Besides the point of a play-action is to sell the defense on thinking run. If you succeed in the sell and then they play the run and your OL is playing the pass you're not getting a hole big enough for a mouse to run through.

As you noted you also don't have linemen (or WR/TEs for that matter) continuing blocks downfield which means you are limiting the ability of a play becoming a big play. So you're handicapping yourself from the start. Going back to why this works in college you can see it just by listening to any rookie lineman or WR describe their transition from college to the pros. Every single detail becomes vital to their ability to win. From reading the other side of the ball through study to the importance of hand placement for OL/DL, route running for WRs, coverage for linebackers, etc. Everything has to be at such a precise level that gimmicks can't be sustained.

Even with a seriously elusive, mobile QB (not always the same thing) or a running back who can make multiple people miss and find hole where no one else can the chances of this working at a sustained rate are incredibly small in the NFL. The only possible way this works, IMHO, is if you have 4 or 5 all-pro linemen, an all-pro WR, and a great QB. But if you have all of those things then why are you bothering with this?

We may or may not get to see this in action, but I think you are making far too much of the blocking assignments, and I dont think a great QB is required in the least. Too many people here are stuck on this idea that Blackmon was involved, insinuating that only a great WR mismatch can make the passing element of this work. I think its not that at all, its about the WR occupying open space, not overpowering the CB to beat 1-1 coverage. Its also not correct to assume that you can only use 1 WR in this. There is no reason multiple receiving threats couldn't be drawn into plays like these. We will see but I think its to early to assume that this is a "gimmick" at all. Maybe it is, maybe it isnt.

pup wrote:Like stated above, the read option in the NFL with a slow footed QB, or a small guy that cannot take the abuse (so anyone other than Cam) is simply not an option. At best it is play action with an option to hand the ball off.

But that doesn't work. If you are running a play-action the linemen as still blocking for a pass although they usually attempt to disguise it as much as possible to attempt to get the D to buy into the fake. If the pass rushers hesitate a half-tic then that allows the half-tic delay to pass to work out. If you get that same hesitation in someone in the secondary then you have your viable play action pass attempt.

If you attempt to hand off in a play-action pass the blockers are not attempting to open the gap. Besides the point of a play-action is to sell the defense on thinking run. If you succeed in the sell and then they play the run and your OL is playing the pass you're not getting a hole big enough for a mouse to run through.

As you noted you also don't have linemen (or WR/TEs for that matter) continuing blocks downfield which means you are limiting the ability of a play becoming a big play. So you're handicapping yourself from the start. Going back to why this works in college you can see it just by listening to any rookie lineman or WR describe their transition from college to the pros. Every single detail becomes vital to their ability to win. From reading the other side of the ball through study to the importance of hand placement for OL/DL, route running for WRs, coverage for linebackers, etc. Everything has to be at such a precise level that gimmicks can't be sustained.

Even with a seriously elusive, mobile QB (not always the same thing) or a running back who can make multiple people miss and find hole where no one else can the chances of this working at a sustained rate are incredibly small in the NFL. The only possible way this works, IMHO, is if you have 4 or 5 all-pro linemen, an all-pro WR, and a great QB. But if you have all of those things then why are you bothering with this?

Personally I think the agenda was to make some of us feel better about Weeds.

And I do.

Whatever they did tonight was clearly a ploy to suck in the Eagles. I'm sure the innovative offense that takes advantage of Weeden's natural abilities will be implemented in the regular season.

Can't wait til a run play is called and checked out of to a pass. Completely different look watching Pinkston and Schwartz play turnstile on a pass play as opposed to watching someone knife past them on the inside on a run.

Innovative and Shurmur are antonyms. Maybe when Weeds hits 30 he'll be utilized properly. Good news is we don't have to wait long at all for that.

peeker643 wrote:Personally I think the agenda was to make some of us feel better about Weeds.

And I do.

Whatever they did tonight was clearly a ploy to suck in the Eagles. I'm sure the innovative offense that takes advantage of Weeden's natural abilities will be implemented in the regular season.

Can't wait til a run play is called and checked out of to a pass. Completely different look watching Pinkston and Schwartz play turnstile on a pass play as opposed to watching someone knife past them on the inside on a run.

Innovative and Shurmur are antonyms. Maybe when Weeds hits 30 he'll be utilized properly. Good news is we don't have to wait long at all for that.

I simple "I told you so" would have sufficed, don't you think?

I don't need to be patient, they're going to be shit forever. - CDT, discussing my favorite NFL team

peeker643 wrote:Personally I think the agenda was to make some of us feel better about Weeds.

And I do.

Whatever they did tonight was clearly a ploy to suck in the Eagles. I'm sure the innovative offense that takes advantage of Weeden's natural abilities will be implemented in the regular season.

Can't wait til a run play is called and checked out of to a pass. Completely different look watching Pinkston and Schwartz play turnstile on a pass play as opposed to watching someone knife past them on the inside on a run.

Innovative and Shurmur are antonyms. Maybe when Weeds hits 30 he'll be utilized properly. Good news is we don't have to wait long at all for that.

I simple "I told you so" would have sufficed, don't you think?

Just wait until Richardson emerges and we start puttin' it on these squads FOUR YARDS AT A TIME. Man, it's gonna be like the sixties all over again. When they zig, you zag. Everyone's gonna be gearing up for these high level passing games, and we're gonna hit em' with a 25 year old strategy.